#and it would make so much sense - but am i just conflating things in my brain? is it just anxiety (which idek if i have either)?

[2rats1gogh]

Same anon here with more- people need to stop conflating Aegon with Joffrey Baratheon.

Aegon has done some despicable things that I won’t make excuses for but he’s not the rabid dog that Joffrey was. Cersei, Tyrion and Tywin struggled to rein him in at 13 years old and once that crown was on his head a monster was let loose. Alicent can actually reason and get through to Aegon at pivotal times. Cersei could not do that with Joffrey.

Aegon above all craves Alicent’s approval and affection, he turns into a sniveling mess at Alicent’s scolding at his big age. Alicent is not afraid to tell Aegon exactly what she’s thinking. She doesn’t placate, pacify or coddle like everyone had to do with Joffrey because he was out of control, cruel AND stupid at the same time. Helaena is the most important person in the world to Alicent and Aegon is not going to harm the most precious thing in the world to Alicent. Helaena doesn’t have to fear Aegon bashing her head in with a rock or choking her after she has just had a stillbirth….

He called her an idiot at 14, yes it wasn’t nice but it was completely normal. At 14 I called my sister a cunt right across the dinner table, but I've also fought for that same sister. They are siblings and that interaction that made them seem more human as opposed to their 2 dimensional team black counterparts who always just smile and have kind words for each other- except when Jacaerys was beating the shit out of Luke on the beach, but no one is saying how miserable Luke was despite Luke actually seeming unhappy with parts of his life. He was even vocal about these things. Whereas Heleana who is a blunt speaker, has not said anything like that.

Helaena doesn’t look afraid of Aegon, she doesn’t look afraid of anyone in her immediate family (including Criston) as much as team black would like her to be. At the most Aegon ignores her, like she said. Honestly ignoring her is preferable to what Viserys was doing to Alicent. She had 3 children before she even reached 20. Aemond and Helaena are almost Irish twins. In the show Helaena and Aegon just have the twins who are maybe 4-5 years old, so Aegon is not forcing himself on Helaena.

We don’t know much about Helaena in the show because they decide to delete certain scenes and include other stupid filler scenes when they contain fan favorites…but Helaena in the book was happy. Her input towards the war was valued. She loved her children and everyone could agree she was a wonderful mother.

Her life isn’t perfect, there is no woman in that time period whose life is. Her husband is so far from perfect but that doesn’t mean Helaena lived a life of misery.

The book even says basically that Helaena died with Jaehaerys that night and Alicent didn’t kill Jaehaerys. That was Daemon Targaryen.

And when pointing the finger at Alicent, remember that she didn’t make Helaena on her own. She had a useless father who ignored her and her siblings her entire life. Viserys withheld his love from them out of some twisted loyalty to his first wife that he killed and his oldest child by this wife. These things would have a deep emotional impact on a person, it certainly has on her brothers. Stop letting Viserys off the hook.

(the way you called Joffrey a rabid dog omg I’m cryingggg😭😭😭😭 shxjskkzkvzlclwgzjpf)

but yeah, you are so so so right.

I hate it when people, mostly TB, compare Aegon to Joffrey. Like the ONLY two things they have in common is an ambitious (?) widow mother queen and also the fact that both aren’t very nice people. But that’s about it. Aegon at his worst doesn’t even come close to how horrendous Joffrey was on a regular day. Aegon never killed people for fun, he didn’t publicly humiliate Helaena like Joffey did with Sansa. And as I say, I am ignoring the fact that he’s a rapist because it was literally added out of nowhere, makes no sense, and has no relevance to the plot whatsoever. It was added purely to make Aegon and TG look bad. Canonically he is literally just a lazy alcoholic.

And I absolutely agree with what you said about Helaena. TB often say that “aLiCeNt MaDe HeR LiFe HeLl” but she literally didn’t? She would NEVER have her marry Aegon if Aegon was like Joffrey Baratheon. You can call Aegon every insult in the book, he was neglectful, he ignored her, he wasn’t really present in the lives of their kids, but he was NOT an abusive husband or father. And as you said, unlike Viserys, he never forced himself on Helaena. He wasn’t obsessed with the idea of having as many children as possible with her. Literally not at any point his nonexistent “abusive” behavior is shown, not even in the show. During the dinner scene Helaena literally jokes about her relationship with him, she seems comfortable and chill.

Sure, as you said, her life was far from perfect. In the books she does give birth at 14, in the show, since everyone is slightly older, she most likely was 16? Not that uncommon actually. She still had her mother, and her brothers, she has sir Criston. Aegon’s behavior was controlled by Alicent, so he would NEVER hurt her. If you remember how Alicent reacted to Aegon forcing himself upon Dyana (dumb scene overall but still) you can only imagine how she would react if he treated Helaena the same way.

[gotstabbedbyapen]

Hyacinthus Iceberg Meme EXPLAIN (P5)

Part 1 ✿ Part 2 ✿ Part 3 ✿ Part 4 ✿ Part 5

It's time for me to answer your questions about this Hyacinthus iceberg meme. There is a lot to tackle, so I'll divide it into 5 parts for the sake of my sanity.

Quick disclaimer: I am NOT an expert in Greek mythology, just a fan of Hyacinthus who wants to learn about him and anyone related to him. Most of the things I'm about to discuss are just theories and speculations of a passerby on the Internet, so do not take them as valid facts!

Bonus disclaimer: We are now entering the "just a theory" section of the iceberg. While the previous parts have myths and essays to back them up, most of the sections here are theories I made up (or shared with other scholars) and might not always be supported by literature texts.

What is the meaning of Hyacinthus' name?

We know is that "Hyacinthus" is a very old name, because the "-nth" suffix indicates its pre-Hellenic origin, or at least that's what Bernard C. Dietrich's "The Origins of Greek Religion" said (cited on Wikipedia). I haven't found a free PDF version of this book yet so I can't verify myself, but if any of you can, I would really appreciate your input!

Because "Hyacinthus" is very ancient, I have two questions: what is the meaning of this name and or what word/root did it derive from?

According theo Theoi.com, Hyacinthus' name was translated to "Larkspur flower" (as seen below)

However, I suspect this translation was coined much later when the god Hyacinthus had been watered down to a mortal, and the name meaning had been morphed and might not hold true for the ancient Hyacinthus. Or the ancient Hyacinthus name did mean "larkspur" and the myth was written to explain why this god share the same name as the flower.

Who knows!

Hyacinthus is the aboriginal god of Amyclae

This is just me doing some Olympic-level mental gymnastics. I can't remember where or if I've read this theory in any other research before, so you gotta endure my mindless rambling in this part.

With the many evidence indicating Hyacinthus was a pre-Hellenic god with a defined role and worship in Amyclae (Sparta), can he also be the very first god in this land? Here's how I think it's plausible:

According to Pausanias' Description of Greece, in Lacedaemonian traditions, Hyacinthus is a direct descendant of Lelex, the in-myth aboriginal king of Laconia. So what if this is a case of people from the same family line being conflated with each other? It seemed to happen with Polyboea and her great-granddaughter Phylonoe, who were often identified with one another (although this one is still questionable as I haven't found any academic articles).

And there you have it. Hyacinthus and Lelex. There could be a slim chance.

Why was Hyacinthus watered down into a mortal???

Hyacinthus was once a chthonic vegetation god worshipped in Amyclae, so why was he watered down into a mortal (or at best, a demigod) in the now-known myth? Was it because when Apollo's cult came along he was turned into a mortal and killed off to "make room" for the new god? But even then, Hyacinthus was still brought back and worshipped with Apollo as a duo, so why all the changes?

And this is not just a strange transition for Hyacinthus. Ariadne was also an ancient Great Goddess of Crete (even with the super cool epithet "Mistress of the Labyrinth") now became a princess. I wonder if the other mortal heroes, especially the ones that was made immortal later, had the same treatment as well.

Hyacinthus and Apollo are "married"

The word "married" should be put in triple quotation marks because Apollo and Hyacinthus weren't actually married like a gay couple would in the 21st century. What I mean is they are "married" in the sense of sharing a shrine together and are worshipped as a duo. Zeus and Hera, a famous married deity couple, shared a lot of shrines together.

So now we have the Apollo - Hyakinthos cult. Hyacinthus once had a wife (who could be Polyboea, as seen in the next section), but she was replaced by Apollo. What's interesting is that Apollo became Hyacinthus' shrine spouse instead of replacing him, resulting in a male-male duo, rather than the typical male-female duo, with seemingly equal respect. Some would argue they were one and the same.

As to why this happens to Apollo and Hyacinthus, I haven't found articles discussing it yet. I will try though!

Polyboea is either Hyacinthus' OG wife or daughter

I suspect the OG shrine spouse of Hyacinthus - before Apollo's worship came to Amyclae - was Polyboea.

Brother-sister sibling duos in Greek mythology are often depicted as husband and wife, e.g. Kronos-Rhea, Zeus-Hera, and even Apollo-Artemis were derived from a married couple before they became twins. Because Polyboea and Hyacinthus are siblings, were depicted to be carried to the Heavens together, and possibly worshipped in the same shrine and festival (the Hyacinthia), they could have been an ancient deity couple in Amyclae.

Are there any basis on this? Well, the website Occult World cited that "The Golden Bough" by James George Frazer was the one suggested this theory, and I'm still looking for a free PDF to fact-check it (yes, I'm a cheap one looking for free stuff)

I've mentioned the theory of Polyboea being Hyacinthus' daughter in part 4, that is was suggested in the book "Cults of Apollo at Sparta" by Michael Pettersson:

Basically, Hyacinthus the prince and Hyacinthus the father of the Hyacinthides (in part 4) could be conflated with one another, and therefore, the scene of Hyacinthus and Polyboea on the altar relief was depicting a father sacrificing his daughter. But there is also another interpretation in this book: Polyboea, the daughter, is going through a ritual where she went from a maiden to a woman.

The Hyacinthia was also seen as an initiation rite by ancient Spartan, where young boys and girls who attended the festival will leave it as official adults. The boys will become men ready to join the military and the girls will become women ready to enter marriage.

Furthermore, the presence of Demeter - Kore/Persephone - Hades trio and Artemis - Athena - Aphrodite trio might serve as allegories. We know, from part 4, that the former trio was connected to the Hyacinthia because Persephone's abduction myth symbolize the girl-to-woman the transition.

But what about the latter? Well, according to Pettersson:

Yeah, the virgin goddesses Artemis and Athena represent Polyboea's maidenhood stage and Aphrodite, goddess of love and fertility, is her entering the married life of womanhood.

As from the allegories from the gods, along with the preparation for a sacrificed maiden and a soon-to-be-wedded bride being similar, Polyboea's role as the "sacrificed daughter" and the "maiden becoming woman" could go hand in hand.

Of course, the explanation is more complicated than what I just presented, so I really recommend you guys to check out the book itself for a full view!

Who is Hyacinthus before Apollo?

Let's be real, we (admittedly, myself included) know Hyacinthus first as a lover of Apollo, and second as his own person. When we read the myth, it mostly focus on Apollo's conquest and grief, not much about the prince himself.

So it begs the question: who is Hyacinthus before Apollo?

Is he a local god the Amycleans worshipped before the arrival of Apollo's cult?

Is he a real life man with such great deeds that he was deified in the eyes of his people?

What other heroic achievements did he make?

Was he ever known by a different name?

Has he always been Hyacinthus or is this just the final form he took after millennia of changes?

We cannot know for sure, and we probably never will.

In fact, this final part of the explanation series isn't to be answered, but be used as a prompt for future studying of this prince and god of Sparta. As you can see from my iceberg meme and explain series, there is actually a lot more about Hyacinthus than meets the eye. His historical impacts, worship evolution, mythology roles, etc. aren't as well-documented as other characters, so he can be quite obscure or not analyzed as much by the general audience. He was more than just a lover who died.

This is one of the reasons why I love Hyacinthus, studying him is both a thrill and a pain because there is so much and so little to obtain. And I hope my silly brain rot over him will inspire you to learn just a bit more about my favorite Spartan prince.

THE END

[mediacinemtographyartetc]

Yeah I loved good omens...but fuck Neil Gaiman idgaf - it's not just "believe victims"

Its the fact that he responded! They said rape, he said it was "cuddling." but even if it all blows over and he does end up innocent it doesn't matter. Theres so many bad news people can take and so much mental exhaustion to deal with petty bullshit. So even if it blows over how can I sit and watch anything he makes without thinking back on these allegations and feeling disgust? Well most will either seperate art from the artist, or learn not to have parasocial relationships and put them on a pedestal.

And that goes for david tenent too, he's just a guy. But the more people paint him up and make memes that he's oh so much better then it's a matter of time before he gets the spotlight and the cycle repeats.

Another is conflating the LGBT community alongside him, that bigots say "Of course he ended up being a sexual devient by writing gay porn for the woke mob." which is another headache within itself that lgbt are now dragged into it and he is used as an example to encourage homophobia [thats on the bigots not neil but given that lgbt is now in the crossfire is both a headache AND a distraction people look at a MAN assualting a WOMEN and make the whole argument into LGBT = Pedophiles as if that type of logic makes sense? but its twiiter what should i expect.]

But I have to admit to human weakness as well, personally I think most fans ruin shows or opinions on people. that point when a show is ruined it's not the author or the show it's the bad takes fans make and the hate is directed at them. So I can't help but laugh and think on that time I made a post about how Good Omens comes across as queerbait only because before season 2 it had similair patterns to other shows and movies that queerbaited and I was just pointing out those patterns- not to mention I tried to say since day one:

Just because an author alignes themselves with your type of politics doesn't make them a good person. JK rowling said dumbeldore was gay and hermione was black she was an ally of the LGBT look at her now. And when I said just because Neil is an ally he could end up the same as JK rowling. And by a fan was told "Just because a couple authors did similair things doesn't mean this would happen again, you're crazy."

So to all those 'fans' who dogpiled me on that post, send threatening messages and put words in my mouth and treating me like shit while in the same breath saying "The good omens fandom is a positive fandom." I am laughing now. The patterns I noticed and pointed out that PISSED you off so much.

I can now say with relish delight.

"I. Fucking. Told. you. So."

[eff-plays]

What do you think about the claims that Astarion fans who are headcanoning him as being soft and romantic with Tav are just stealing this character trait from Wyll? It's been going on in the fandom for a while and it's frankly getting annoying. I know many people (haters and fans alike) likely never played the game beyond Act 1 and/or think Astarion is like that throughout the entire story, that he's evil and incapable of changing as a character, but saying he doesn't have any romantic moments is just...not true?

Ooooh!! Interesting question and I have opinions on it that are, I hope, a bit more nuanced here as a stan of both Astarion and Wyll.

It's gonna be a bit of a mess to explain though so please bear with me as I try to untangle this conundrum.

I think!! That both sides have a point but are just sorta talking past each other a bit.

Does Astarion display a lot of gentleness and softness toward Tav in Act 2 and his Spawn ending? Yes! Absolutely!! People who deny this or argue that him displaying these canonical traits is "stealing" from Wyll are, in my opinion, incorrect, and are letting their somewhat justifiable personal dislike for the guy and the very justified distaste for how the fandom treats him compared to Wyll bleed into their perception of this specific part of his portrayal.

HOWEVER.

A lot of people who enjoy Soft!Astarion do end up stepping into the same cow plops as the Dom Daddy Astarion stans, in that their equivalent of romantic, soft Astarion is the classic gentlemanly, smooth-talking, chivalrous guy who knows how to woo his lover in the traditional, classic ways. I do not think this is, um, faithful to his character. At all. This is the aspect that some fans, in an attempt to express that Astarion can be gentle and romantic, end up either accidentally or purposefully "stealing" from Wyll.

The fact that Astarion can and will be soft and gentle in a romance is conflated with how he would express those feelings, in the typical fandom way of "well I like this guy and I like the idea of these things so I will attribute those things to this guy". Which in this case just ends up taking away from Wyll. Like, if you supposedly "like" the idea of a traditionally romantic and smooth character, why are you then assigning those traits to a guy who is neither of those things, when a guy who IS those things gets a suspicious zero of your attention?

Am I making sense?

Astarion IS capable of being gentle and soft with his lover, but he would not EXPRESS it the way Wyll would. And by making Astarion express something he would feel in a way that's more Wyll-flavored, it does raise some flags. If this is the dynamic you're interested in, why aren't you into Wyll more? If you're interested in Astarion being soft, why don't you like him expressing it how he would express it, aka being awkward, goofy, inexperienced, and saccharine? If you love Astarion so much, why are you assigning to him the traits of a different guy?

Why are you taking Wyll's expressions of love to make Astarion more palatable and suited to your tastes? What is it about Wyll that you don't like if his expressions and characteristics fit your preferences more? Ya feel me?

So when some people say that "Astarion wouldn't be soft and romantic, stop stealing from Wyll!" what they usually mean is "Astarion would not express himself this way, and you taking stuff from a Black character and giving them to a white dude is kinda sus and I'm tired of it."

And what Astarion fans hear is "Your guy is fuck and I hate him. Here's me denying his canonical depth and character growth."

You get me??

On that note, I also have some thots on character-swapping in cutscenes, which is slightly related to this. On the one hand, I think it's like whatever, ya know? I've seen tons of gifs where somebody swapped in Solas and Lavellan into the dance at the ball in DA:I. Make your guys do whatever. I even have a scene planned in my fic where Astarion dances with Hiraeth (though not like that, it's a bit more intimate/awkward cuz Astarion is self-conscious and weird aobut it), so I don't think he wouldn't dance with Tav. I just don't think he'd do it how Wyll would do it.

But when you see Astarion and Gale gifs dancing with Tav over and over and over and over, while seeing Wyll swapped in for someone else happens once upon a dream (I've literally only seen Wyll standing in for Astarion in the forest sex scene ONCE), it does sorta ... Leave a taste in ya mouth, ya know? Like if you want a romance with a cute dance scene ... There is already a guy ... You definitely know about him. And while I don't think every individual person who wants to see their OC dance with their love interest is inherently racist for character-swapping, it becoming a trend in fandom that fails to produce the same amount of content for the Black character whose cutscenes they're using is still, uh, yikes. Ya know? Like the fandom loves the cutscene but Wyll's presence in his own content is rare. For some reason.

[lover-of-mine]

Hi! So much has happened. Picking through different details to make sure this message is not repetitive because I know you have many many spies by now.

Firstly: the fake article. I cannot find who originally posted it. Only a screenshot from a BT mad about it. But apparently a Buddie made a fake post about a fake article about Lou quitting acting. They are very upset about it. It is ‘harassment’ apparently. People are offended that it cites mental health scare as the reason Lou would allegedly quit acting. As if BTs were not saying that Eddie should kill himself to mirror Ryan’s history of suicidality? Throwing stones from glass houses.

Here is the fake article screenshot. https://x.com/xfirepilot/status/1822790104525500839?s=46&t=i5gFcB_0q-6E5MZXiGtU_w

Secondly: Mark decided to lie about having ‘sources’ saying Lou is back on set this week. If he is not spotted… prepare for a full meltdown. They are CONVINCED this is the week. Especially because of the hangar. The longer they go without a sighting the more they lose it. They keep saying ‘quiet’ in hopes that it will make things happen (ie make Lou show up) which is kind of lame tbh. Taking all the fun out of the q word bit.

Thirdly: Happy birthday Peter! 9-1-1’s Instagram account posted a video of JLH + Oliver + Tracie + Ryan + Aisha + Kenny wishing him a happy birthday. Declan (Denny) also posted a photo of him and Peter. BTs are pretending that this is fine but are secretly losing it. Lou should be on set because of the hangar photo! Why is he not in that video! Why has he not posted about Peter’s birthday! But at the same time they are falling back once again on the ‘Lou is purposefully being hidden’ theory. Which is incompatible with their beliefs they will get a sighting this week.

Fourthly: one of them is saying a promo video will be released this week and promo photos the week after. I was not in the fandom in previous years but afaik this does not line up with past promo timelines? But correct me if I am wrong.

Fifthly: someone created a tumblr account called @killkinard and they are saying it is a death threat against Lou? Not Tommy? Very dramatic.

https://x.com/hofevanbuckley/status/1823057221053251994?s=46&t=i5gFcB_0q-6E5MZXiGtU_w

Sixthly: the subreddit drama… oh the subreddit drama. Okay. So. A BT shipper decided to make a new 9-1-1 subreddit because the main subreddit is way too Buddie focused. Complaining about anything to do with Tommy being downvoted on the main subreddit. So far the new subreddit has 35 members (as opposed to the 34170 members on the main reddit). So far half the posts on the new subreddit are transplanted from the main subreddit or the BT subreddit. Literally cross-posted. Makes sense that they do not like the main subreddit though. There was recently a post saying ‘why does Tommy get so much hate for being a bigot when half the main cast are cheaters’ uhhh because he is RACIST? And SEXIST? Honestly maybe it is a good thing they have that space now. Keep them contained away from the rest of us.

Seventhly and finally: someone said ‘I hope Lou posts a black and white picture Oliver takes of him on set’. They want Oliver and Lou to be Oliver and Ryan so bad oh my god. Not beating the Tommy/Eddie conflation allegations. Really all they ever do is steal from us. They have started calling Buddies ‘BDs’ now like we call them BTs. They are claiming Oliver’s new happy social media presence is a sign that he is filming with Lou. Everything we have or we say gets twisted and made about that man.

Anyways. I think it will be very funny if Lou does not show up this week. Especially because the hangar seems to be related to a Ryan and Kenny scene: https://x.com/buckleysbf/status/1823000264183271494?s=46&t=i5gFcB_0q-6E5MZXiGtU_w

Hi love 🩵

I don't even know what to say. I'm just staring at my phone. They really can't tell actors apart from characters huh? And this is a lot. I did the see part of the fake article drama but didn't fully get it. They definitely just want Tommy to be Eddie. I can't believe they dropped the BoB thing, come on guys, you don't have to copy everything we do. I do expect them to continue to detach themselves from reality more if Lou doesn't show up soon, even with the whole "they're hiding him" fantasy they have going.

[the-sun-and-the-sea]

Imo its more of a mass thing, not individuals. Annie is not a very present character in the sense we don't learn much about her. She's an accessory to a male character which is not good in itself.

So because of how little page time she has, there's no single way to "correctly" characterize her. But I see a lot of hatred towards certain tropes people assign to her. Expressing annoyance that some choose to have her come from an unstable background, annoyance that she has a certain trait. I would understand if it came from a view of infantalizing her due to her mental health issues. I agree with the takes saying that she shouldn't be portrayed as incompetent, due to the implications it has about mentally ill people.

What I'm talking about is constant complaint about backstory choices people make for he r/traits they give her. It's been a while since I've seen people actually just enjoying themselves in the odesta fandom. It's good to discuss differing opinions and viewpoints but the way it is sometimes done on here does not open a welcoming space to discuss these views. Instead they appear to try and assert an objectively "right" way to portray her personality and backstory.

There are others who feel like this, I am aware. I enjoy the debates in the fandom. Whether she was a Career and volunteered, or reaped. Those things. They open for an interesting and broadening discussion. What, and this is only *my* opinion, makes the community unwelcoming is the aforementioned. Constant complaints about the unimportant things that do not serve purpose other than to just re-express personal fanfiction preferences.

I think people need to be more open to other interpretations of Annie.

Yes, I agree people should stop being ableist about her character. But a lot of the community doesn't seem to understand there is a difference between an insensitive portrayal of Annie, and one that they just dislike. To try and discourage the latter and make it out to be the wrong characterization is what makes myself and others feel unwelcomed.

I'm pleased that there is greater awareness of how to write mentally ill people. But the Odesta tumblr community has started to feel like a large but tight private club that you have to gain validation to get into. Rather than being a place to share love for a ship, it has become a community you have to earn a relevant place in by having the "right" opinions.

Not aimed at anyone in particular, I must mention. I have yapped a lot but I hope somewhere I am coherent. 💜

you know what i have been thinking about this too, and i totally agree. We should be wary of portrayals of Annie that are disrespectful but i think that can sometimes be conflated with portrayals that aren’t to our personal tastes.

I also feel like the fandom on here has sort of attributed traits to Annie that have become widely accepted which can make it harder for people to suggest new or contradictory ideas.

Also I’m just going to throw my own popular opinion out there: when it comes to characters like Annie who don’t have a lot of canon info, phrases like “no one understands her like i do” just perpetuate the idea that there is only one possible interpretation. I am aware people say that as a joke and that’s not necessarily a bad thing but like…i don’t know how you can say that when there’s not a lot there to understand in the first place.

Thanks for clarifying!

[lurking-latinist]

re: these tags

THAT'S SO COOL AHHHH!! good for you aubreyad community stays winning

[introducing this with a disclaimer in case i'm wrong about everything: i am only halfway through the series rn (just about to finish 10) and also am but a mere undergrad classics major who has yet to even declare said major and I probably don't have the right to be yapping about propertius. nevertheless i shall.]

anyway i have been growing persistently more insane about diana's proximity to a Lot of classical imagery, like how her first appearance in post captain is literally during a fox hunt + all the gender stuff she has going, obviously linking her to mythological diana (and artemis if we're going to conflate the two) but your take has sent me in a whole new direction with that-- because she doesn't actually really embody the artemis archetype all too much overall (an emphasized character trait being that she's notably Not Chaste) EXCEPT in relation to stephen, w/ whom her relationship is much more brotherly than it is sensual i guess?

which would align very well with your idea of diana as elegiac puella-- sort of in a way being mythologized by stephen-- resulting in the reader actually being able to see two different manifestations of her character (one through the eyes of an omniscient prosaic narrator and one through the perspective of stephen as a "poet" figure). and i just think that's neat.

my latin class has also been looking at a few of propertius' love elegies and, at least to me, they read a lot like if stephen 1.) hated himself significantly less and 2.) were less indecisive in writing about his Feelings?? 1.8 (and all of the poems concerning cynthia moving/traveling away and propertius being all moody about it) is very reminiscent of the arc from post captain to the surgeon's mate imo. 1.12 is also Literally Him-- "cynthia prima fuit cynthia finis erit" can be compared to stephen's poetic catastrophizing about how his life is Literally Over and Love Is Dead when he believes to have fallen out of love with diana!?!? i'm going to lose my mind.

sorry for dumping all of this on you unprompted and also sorry for the fact that it probably does not make sense. peace and love

if undergrad classicists don't talk about propertius literally WHO WILL. (genuinely my currently-being-written phd dissertation chapter is based on an idea I had in the class I read propertius in freshman year. never feel like you're not a 'real scholar' or something yet, because you honestly never do become something different, you just keep reading and talking and this is what we do! there's nothing realer than this!)

oh wow that's really well put--we kind of get to see her from an omniscient-narrator perspective and through the eyes of her lover who is Not Being Normal About Her. very nice!

yeah I keep reading bits of propertius and being like "hmm is po'b going to quote this one I wonder." (he doesn't mostly but I keep thinking he should. because I want the aubreyad to be denser and less accessible I guess? :P) there's a lot of catullus woven in too of course - I associate Catullus 72 with the 'falling out of love' arc (my dude that is not what falling out of love looks like).

oh gosh yes 1.8 -- that was one of the things I was trying to describe to Distinguished Classicist, the way she's so -- what's the word I want? not volatile... she disappears. she's constantly Gone. you turn around and oops, she's eloped to Sweden. (honestly though if Cynthia and Propertius could manage to have *fake* revenge affairs that would actually be *great*, for them that would be an improvement.) Gareth Williams (in a chapter called, amazingly, "From Grave to Rave") describes Cynthia as "ever only elusively visible in the narratological mist" and I feel like that's a bit what's going on with Diana. For her there's a genre element as well--she's a woman in the Men Going to Sea books, and even though the Aubreyad gives way more time to women than the average Men Going to Sea book, the fact is the camera frequently simply isn't on her. We see far more of Stephen thinking about her, hearing rumors, etc. than we do of her actually being on the page. Now in elegy nobody seems to be quite fully on the page, we only get "fragments of story" as Genevieve Liveley and Patricia Salzmann-Mitchell say (excellent collection by that name btw, I recommend checking it out if you're at all interested in narrative and lyric/elegy). But Diana manages this while being in a novel, which is impressive to me.

yeah stephen as a character is a lot more... self-reflective? than propertius' speaker. for one thing he's in a novel, I think, so he can actually... have a series of contiguous experiences. he's also a compulsive diarist which is helpful for self-reflection I guess. and more mature, like, as a human being, than propertius' speaker, who apparently does nothing with his life except be in love and write poetry, he doesn't exist outside of as a poetic voice whereas, again, stephen benefits from a third-person narrator and has medicine and spying to do and so on. also he's Catholic.

I love the "Catullus-and-water" line, it's like O'Brian just put in a little wink to those of us who would notice this, like, "yes I am doing this on purpose." All in all I've pretty much defaulted to assuming that O'Brian is doing things on purpose. although he did forget Babbington's first name that one time and retconned it very awkwardly

[our-aroace-experience]

Hi! So this is probably going to be a long and messy rant, but I had a fight with my allo friends recently about the feelings I have for a co-worker, and I just want to know what fellow aroace people think about this situation.

For context: I have a coworker that I have feelings for, but I'm not sure exactly *what* those feelings are. I spent a long time overthinking whether my feelings where platonic or romantic, and I decided to tell my best friends so I could get their help or support.

When I mentioned my coworker has a partner, my friends shut me down completely.

They told me to forget about it, that I shouldn't be friends with my coworker, and that I needed to keep a distance from said coworker.

I explained to them that I just wanted to be friends. I told them I didn't want a romantic relationship with my coworker, I wanted a fully platonic relationship, similar to the one I currently have with my best friends.

None of it mattered. My friends were more concerned with how my coworker's partner would view the friendship.

They said since my coworker is in a relationship it doesn't make sense to spend time with them one on one outside of work. They even went so far as to say if my coworker developed feelings for me it would put my coworker in a tight situation.

It felt like they were saying if I felt romantic attraction then that meant something was going to happen, even though I have zero interest in a romantic relationship. And it felt like they were putting a stranger first before putting me, their friend, first. So I tried to further explain my feelings and why I was so confused about everything.

And my friends said that if I saw my coworker as just a friend then I shouldn't be questioning my feelings :')

I was heartbroken because in almost a decade of friendship this was the first time that I felt my friends didn't respect, or at the very least didn't understand, my aromanticism.

I feel like I can never talk to my best friends about this type of stuff ever again. And how am I suppose to? I can't express how much their reaction hurt me.

They said I was overthinking things, and they're right about that, but my friends also don't understand how much of a big deal this was to me.

They even kept conflating my aromanticism with my asexuality and making comments about my aceness, even though asexuality wasn't apart of the conversation at all. I know 100% I am not sexually attracted to my coworker. The question was whether I'm platonicly attracted or romantically attracted. And even if my feelings are romantic, I don't want a romantic relationship.

I want to be friends with my coworker. I want to hang out with them and learn more about them. Is that really such a crime when I don't fully understand my feelings?

I guess what I want to know is, am I in the wrong here? In this situation, am I the problem?

i don’t see why being friends with someone would be bad, but i hope it’s worked out for you!

[canidbld]

Pet Regression and Puppyhood

Content warning: none

Word count: 950

— day 9 day 5 of Sol's Writing Challange

My journey to eventually identifying as a therian, in retrospect, is kind of silly to look back on. Simply because it's one of those moments where it's like "oh you were always that thing, weren't you?" You know what I'm talking about, right? Like it was such an obvious conclusion that sometimes you just feel dumb you didn't realise sooner.

Before awakening, I was heavily into pet regression and I interacted with that community a lot, alongside many other adjacent communities that let me express being a canine, pet regression was the community I interacted with the most. Specifically, I was (and am) a puppy regressor.

I got into pet regression in 2017 initially, and there weren't a lot of resources that talked about it that much during that time, so I had to figure a lot of stuff out by myself. From my assumption, pet regression seemed like it spawned off of the agere community and didn't have much of the psychological foundation that age regression has. I imagine that pet regression became a thing because adopting more baby animal behaviors and being treated affectionately like a pet helped with other people's regression. It helped people slip into a calmer headspace when they wore puppy ears, watched shows to do with kittens and bunnies, and had their caregiver pet them or played with toys that had baby animals on them.

I mean baby toys are already marketed like that anyways. There's so many elephants and lion themes and motifs on baby bottles and blankets that it'd make sense for age regressors to eventually create a community where they could just be baby animals and adopt traits of their chosen animal when it's reinforced by the little gear they buy for their own regression. But that's just my theory.

I, myself, was a pretty strict pet regression only type of person and didn't really interact with the agere community that much because I didn't relate to them or their imagery. At some point, I actually started growing frustrated with the agere community because I felt jealous that they had so much content to help them when pet regressors didn't have much themselves and even when there were pet regression posts, it was always somehow conflated with agere and was never a stand alone thing, which I desperately wanted. I wanted to live in a pet regression bubble and read and interact with only people who were also strictly petre only accounts.

I've grown up from that mentality now and learnt to be more softer and welcoming towards the agere community and see them as siblings rather than oppositions but the question is: Why was I adamant on staying in the petre community?

Well that's the thing, I can answer this confidently now and say its because I'm a dog but back then I geniuenly didn't even know that was the reason. I just liked being a puppy because it made me happy.

There were some overlaps with the therian community with tags like "puppykin" and "puppy regressor" merging often in posts on tumblr and because, again, content for pet regression was so sparce that I would eventually end up just finding myself in the tags just to see more puppy content. And even then I still, for some reason, was so oblivious to being a dog despite looking through literal dog therian tags.

I think partially the reason I ended up calling and finding myself as a dog therian is because of the 7 years I was in the pet regression community. Just the reinforcement of mentally adopting puppy behaviors and consuming the cute and soft aesthetic and imagery of puppies really played such a big part in my identity being a dog right now. I mean it's just funny to me that I had always been a dog you know?

And the discovery that I was a dog therian really recontexualized my regression for me when I look back on it because now I understand why I was so focused on just interacting with petre content because I think, in some way, I was trying to relive a type of experience I never got to have properly which is puppyhood.

I had a childhood. I was raised by humans and was treated like one, and now I'm an adult. But with the realization that I'm a dog, I think I really wanted to relive what it's like to be a puppy. I read somewhere from a boy age regressor that part of the reason they regressed was because they wanted to relive their boyhood because they never got to when they were growing up as they were trans. They wanted to play with dinosaurs and car toys, and it was reaffirming to him, healing that he got to have this experience now.

You see, if age regressors mentally regress to a younger age then for me, pet regression was the same. I mentally regress to a puppy because I am a dog.

Like, it just all made sense.

I wasn't socialized or raised as a dog. I was never taught properly on how to be canine, and to this day, I am still learning constantly and what it means to be a therian in general. Being able to just be a puppy and experience puppyhood and using pet regression as a way to connect to my theriotype has helped me a lot.

I wonder if it's something like that for other alterhumans as well and if they use regression as a way to connect to their kintype or if regression was a byproduct of their theriotype or if they developed a potential kintype through regressing. I wonder how common it is.

[beautifulpersonpeach]

Hi BPP, lemme pick your beautiful brain abit if you don’t mind. So i think it is really beautiful that jikook decided to enlist together using the buddy program. But no matter how much i think about it, i can’t seem to figure out why they decided to do that if they are not more than friends. Don’t get me wrong, i am not saying that people who are just friends cannot do the buddy program, no, they definitely can and they have in the past but my thing is, with the way almost everyone was kinda convinced that jikook had grown distant and were not as close anymore in chapter two, how do u explain them choosing to go together, being joined at the hip for 18 months? Plus they have to have talked about this at some point way before they applied. So while many of us sat here thinking they were not as close anymore, they were making plans to enlist together as buddies? Why would they even consider this if they weren’t really close to each other and if they were still so close to each other enough to consider using this option, why did they both sometimes act like they were a little distant?

I can understand not wanting things to be so obvious but u could really tell that Jimin especially seemed very…, i dunno, different about Jk in chapter two. I don’t know of i’m making alot of sense rn or if u even understand where i’m coming from (i hope u do) but i’d love to hear what u think.

***

Oh god. I wish you sent me this ask an hour ago when I was still sober because I really want to answer this right this moment but there's at least 6 fingers of Lagavulin in me. Sorry in advance for whatever you read below - I've been told I ramble and I'm more of a cunt when I'm intoxicated.

I want to say I told you so. It was clear that whatever distance jikook showed in Chapter 2 was self-imposed. It looked like a caricature of what an actual breakup would look like, in my opinion. And mind you, I've never been certain that jikook are dating. They might not be and it wouldn't make a real difference to what we've all observed them to be: something more to each other than whatever is normal.

Any distance that showed in Chapter 2 was simply spatial. The way I saw it, Chapter 2 was a period for each member to present themselves to the world as individuals. It's something I believe every member took extremely seriously. It's possibly one reason Jungkook agonized over his album to the point Bang PD intervened and we thankfully got Golden. Chapter 2 was a big deal for them. Necessary. At the same time, all the boys know the narratives they have in the fandom. They know there's a faction of fans who believe either Jimin or Jungkook uses the other to remain popular in the fandom, they likely know most of the least flattering ones floating around. They know external critics are also likely to conflate their individual efforts and motives, whether positively or negatively.

I think it was important for every member to present themselves as a singular artist in Chapter 2, and this was even moreso for jikook because of their reputation of being stuck at the hip and/or overly dependent on each other. So on one hand I think they were more careful about showing their intimacy because of external critics and perceptions, but I also think they did it for themselves. They've always had lives outside each other and they had things they needed to pay attention to in any case, with enlistment looming over the horizon.

But now that it's happened, it feels very obvious that if they had the chance to do the Buddy program, they'd do it. I think part of what you're asking Anon, is which came first - did they decide to 'appear distant' in Chapter 2 before they decided to enlist together? Or was it afterwards?

Personally, I don't think it matters much which came first. They have always and always were going to choose each other. Jikook excite me because they are literally always jikooking. I'm not sure if people think I'm joking whenever I say it, but I mean it when I say I don't worry one second about those lads because they are always jikooking.

Even while they were apparently not so close in Chapter 2, some of those times they looked tormented. What was Jungkook thinking going live, just to stare at Jimin's tattooed chest in SMF Pt 2?

What was that bit with JK naked in bed and Jimin saying he could handle him? Jikook were messy as hell during their supposed 'distance' in Chapter 2 lool. Whether or not they were fucking a girl on the side makes no difference to how I think about what's gone down in the last 18 months, and it likely won't influence what I think of them during the next 18 months.

[stillsolo]

GET TO KNOW THE MUN. respond to the prompts out of character !

what made you pick up the current muse(s) you have? oh, where do i even begin?  well, i suppose i should start with how long sw has been in my life.  ANH was the first movie my mother ever saw when she visited the USA; she saw it with my grandmother ( and subsequently developed a massive crush on harrison, so indiana jones became a huge part of my childhood too lol ).  for this reason, my mother introduced my brother and I to sw when we were actual babies.  then, when the prequels came out, it’s all me and my brother consumed.  from the movies themselves to the original clone wars cartoon to the PS2 games to the novels/book series.  we watched it on a tiny portable player for every trip, and every time my relatives needed us to go away to let the adults talk lol.  it also helped our comprehension of english so much. i can’t recall a time in which sw hasn’t been present in my life! before i joined the tumblr swrpc, i kept to myself in the prequels community, wrote fanfic, and rped anakin on skype.  he’s always been a character that hit a little too close to home in one too many ways.  the main parallel i have with him (that doesn’t relate to his mental issues haha) is his love/devotion/attachment to his mother.  it’s difficult for me to explain without getting into the aspects of my culture (孝順 / filial piety), but in short, i am cantonese; if my mother asked me for my thumb tomorrow, i would give her my arm today.  anakin’s love for his mother, his determination to free her from slavery at an early age, was very touching.  EPII has been memed to oblivion, yes, but the pain i feel when anakin doesn’t get to hear his mother tell him she loves him one last time before she dies, and knowing that it haunts him for the rest of his life (eu), makes me want to throw myself out a window lmao  i have an extremely close relationship with my parents; this sort of pain is absolutely gutting for someone like me. anyway, when i joined the tumblr swrpc, writing han solo was never the plan.  i originally wanted to write luke but ended up changing my mind at the last second.  I’d written well over a dozen fics with han at that point, but was nowhere near confident, so i thought of it as more of an experiment. guess that doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things, because if you really think about it, since the day i started writing him in fics, he hasn’t stopped butting into my brain.  in fact, he’s been harassing me ever since—to the point that i even switched from writing luke to him… lol given my upbringing and my mother’s love for him, han has always been my childhood hero, as well as my brother’s.  our dad was our han solo.  the nostalgic and familial associations run so deep, it’s difficult to articulate.  we share many traits, right down to his universally agreed-upon zodiac sign (sagittarius); i know han solo like the back of my hand—and it’s probably because i wanted to be just like him when i grew up.

is there anything you don’t like to write? character death.  if i have to say another, it’s when people conflate harrison with the character he plays and then decides to address that in a thread.  harrison was a ladies man back in the 80s, and that’s fine, but that doesn’t mean the same for han.  i hate seeing the conflation between the two.  not sure if this happens as often anymore, but there was a time when fics/threads/even han rpers would lean into it, by default, thus totally destroying his character in my eyes.  i mean, write it as a storyline, that’s cool and fine, but infidelity has never been inherently part of his character.  i will die on this fucking hill.

is there anything you really enjoy writing? most unpopular opinion ever: action sequences.  critical situations, fast paced action, thriller scenes featuring immediate, life-threatening circumstances.  i love writing that which exhibits a sense of urgency and tension, with sprinklings of emotional depth and contemplative introspective moments.  scenes with internal conflict combined with aforementioned external events.  even evading enemy forces, sustaining minor/major injuries, dressing wounds.  dunno why those are always the most fun to me.  aside from that?  romance/romantic angst.  i’ve had many writing partners over the years, and each one thought they could outdo me in writing romantic angst.  sometimes, the psychosomatic pain of heartbreak isn’t far from feeling like you’ve lost a limb in battle.

how do you come up with headcanons? by being the most annoying, meticulous person ever.  i’m extremely detail oriented; when i see incongruities in my own work, i perish.  so, when i come up with headcanons, i have to consider all factors that may affect the outcome of whatever question i’ve posed in my mind and feel the need to justify my choices, for whatever reason, by tying it back to XYZ.  my headcanons must align with my muse’s personality, their environment from childhood to adulthood, their current circumstances, and if it’s an AU, how it mirrors canon events.  canon/eu is everything imo, because they are their own choices; it’s what shaped them into the character we know them as.  ofc, this is my process and opinion, so make of that what you will.

do you write in silence or do you play music? no music, no tv.  sometimes people talking is too much for me.  i have adhd and my medication only helps so much.  i will absolutely start writing down the conversation or lyrics playing in the background lol

do you plan your replies or wing them? plotting vs planning replies is different to me.  plotting gives me a foundation, but it can’t be too confining.  to plan a reply is to block out each moment.  if you trap me, i will always deviate; so i wing everything, even when i have a foundation.

do you enjoy shipping? yes, absolutely!  i’m not sure why people tend to assume otherwise, but i’m more open to it than people think.  i’ve never cared about who you write, if they’re in the sw franchise, or even what era of sw etc etc  never given a shit about what people think; if our muses click, they click.  honestly, some of the best ships i’ve had with han, as in the most enjoyable and enlightening of his character, have been ‘crack ships’.

what’s your alias/name? vin, vince, vincent.  vincent van hoe.  trash bin vin.

age? 27!

birthday? dec 2!

favorite color? silver.  if that’s not a color to you, then blue.

favorite song? you can’t expect me to… well, ‘in your eyes’ by the weeknd has been up there for a long time.

last movie you watched? star wars: the clone wars (2008)

last show you watched? … the clone wars lol

last song you listened to? billie jean - MJ.

favorite food? my mother’s 番茄炒蛋 ( egg and tomato stir fry ), unagi, freshly baked breads, fresh fruit …

favorite season? i get mostly tropical weather, but i love a cold winter.

do you have a tumblr best friend? unfortunately, so many people have left the site over the years, but i'm grateful to call these people some of the closest friends i have in the rpc: @techniiciian @desiccation @vibraea @rcvanchist @sgterso @voxcrystallis

tagged : @debelltio thank you for thinking of me!! tagging : if you're still reading this, i tag you!

[saintundying]

I’m sorry for jumping into your inbox with this but I feel like I’m about to start climbing the walls rewatching season 2.

I’m trying to stop myself from getting too much hope up for 70’s Devil’s minion. But like…. if it wasn’t a thing, they are soo toying with us (which hey, they might be 😂).

The “digging around in Daniel’s head” scene in 2x2 drives me insane. Daniel proposing to his wife in 1985, okay, let’s say there’s no earlier Devil’s minion, this is about how different a trajectory his life took in this version of the story compared to 1985 in the books.

But- BUT with the knowledge from the books this scene becomes insane!! Daniel, proposing to his wife, in 1985 and being turned down. Daniel proposing the same year he was turned in the books but isn’t turned in the show?! The camera lingers a moment on Armand while Louis asks about how Alice responded to Daniel’s proposal? THEN!!! then Daniel starts flashing to memories Armand fucking erased from his head!!!! (The proposal being turned down also helps drive me crazy, because of it was just about the different trajectory of his life, why doesn’t she say yes? Why is it instead a rejection that matches with how Daniel isn’t a vampire yet?)

1985 -> Daniel being turned down -> camera lingers on Armand -> memories of Armand, erased by Armand.

How is anyone meant to still have any sanity left after that??

Then they keep rubbing it in with stuff like cutting to Armand making a face after Daniel says “Yah” in 2x4. And I’m not even a hardcore Armand is Alice believer 😭😭, but I’m still standing here with my bloody conspiracy wall covered in red threads. I know there are other explanations (for example, Armand is just about to start an amazing face journey listening to Louis wax about his emotional-support-hallucination-ex-husband, so maybe he’s just not super keen about that) but there’s so much of it that if it’s not meant to mean something… someone in that writers room is doing an evil snicker.

omg never a bother - i love talking theories and devil's minion! i have no sanity left with them

GODD the way this show conflates the Dark Gift with marriage and how lestat turned louis on the alter and daniel proposing armand turn him so they'll be together and equals.......but yea lol, alice is clearly meant to stand out as odd. you are so right that placing that memory in 1985 is weird. they'd be well aware tvc fans would notice that. there's...a lot of weird questions that surround daniel, and by extension, armand. i am fascinated with why armand needed to hurt daniel with alice. he's the one who brings her up and he lets louis hurt him with her memory just enough to unsettle him before soothing his pain. that's armand's thing - i am the hand and the balm (i was literally bothering oldbutchdaniel today about armand/amadeo/daniel and how their dynamic is just reynold/alma and control and care ughh armand you need to settle down!!!) anyway, yea past devil's minion happened to me, but alice is a very real person (i think daniel left armand for her or some mix of that). 70s dm is the only logical reasoning for the show to establish armand would never turn someone only to turn someone a day lateri. armand loves daniel and cant bear him leaving/dying. the end!

also tbh i think the timeline for past dm makes way more sense than i think people believe but you have to subscribe to loumandaniel+dubai is loumand trinity gate era in order to see the vision lol

[holdoncallfailed]

hey, ace person here! I've messaged you before about feeling similarly "left out" of a lot of cultural milestones including dating+sex and I totally sympathize with there not being more discussion about how to live your life as a young adult in the absence of those things. and I agree that sometimes the identity labels definitely get in the way of that discussion.

the asexuality label has felt less and less helpful as I've gotten older, and lately it just makes more sense to say that I'm straight or straight ace, because there is a very small demographic of the opposite gender who I am interested in, and when I do pursue a partner that's the kind of person I want to be with, so it seems like a helpful shorthand. however it still feels useful for me to say that I'm on the asexuality spectrum, because it's very clear to me that my experience of the cultural norms of sexual attraction/dating just do not conform to the ways that other people experience them.

as someone who is also decidedly not aro I also tend to stay out of ace spaces because it annoys me how the two get conflated and how everyone has the idea that asexuality = not having sex/not wanting to have sex/not dating. the sex negativity in those spaces can be super annoying and immature. like for me at least my asexuality is literally just an absence of sexual attraction which is all that asexuality is supposed to mean but it gets wrapped up in all these other cultural meanings about partners and romance and whether or not you want to have sex which is really not what it's about and not the point at all.

also personally the "queerplatonic" label has always bothered me because it seems to be implying that relationships without sex/romance are so wildly different that we need to invent a different term for them. like, you can just have a relationship without those things or a friendship that includes them, the terminology doesn't really matter, all that a relationship is is an agreement between two people.

I think identity in most cases is going to have more nuance and complexity than any single identity label will convey, and I also get exhausted of the microidentities bc like, at the end of the day, my relationship with sexuality (or lack thereof) will not be easy to explain no matter the shorthand. and maybe your lack of dating/sex experience has something to do with being on the asexuality spectrum, and maybe it doesn't, and there still needs to be room for those people in discussions, too. because it's totally normal for sex not to be a part of your life, whether you want it to be or not.

and like yeah, my biggest problems that arise from ny asexuality are not whether or not I'm included in the LBGT+ club, they're more about how the perception of being outside of cultural norms affects me and how people treat me because of it.

idk exactly what my point is but these are complicated ideas and it's hard to talk about. also I get the sense, though I may be wrong, that you personally do actually want to be someone who dates but doesn't know how to go about it, and I greatly empathize with the bitterness that comes with feeling left out from something you desperately want. it might not be something that I ever understand in the way that other people do, but there is still room in the world for people like me and you to have relationships. and I hope that if that is something you want that you find it someday; and if it isn't, I hope you can find the acceptance in yourself that this doesn't mean you're broken or wrong and that there is just as much value in being a single person in the world.

I hope that none of this comes across as rude or snarky, I'm just interested in the discussion and it really is a complicated topic. enjoy the rest of your day~

not rude or snarky at all, thank you for such a thoughtful message especially the last bit, i appreciate it a lot. 🥲

i agree with a lot of what you said and i think you've phrased it all much more reasonably than i would (could?) have lol so i also appreciate that.

i guess my leeriness of the term 'asexual'/its definition as a 'lack of sexual attraction' is that for me PERSONALLY it's not so much a lack of attraction as it is an attraction + lack of follow through. like, i feel attraction toward women and i have a libido but neither have intersected to the extent that i felt compelled to act on it. like why would i try to get another person involved when i could just not go through the trouble of all that. but also i'm aware that that has to do with the deplorably low image i have of myself which i'm allegedly working on with my therapist lmfao...

so in that vein i think i would actually say i would prefer 'asexual' to be understood as a lack of sex because in my mind my issue with having a relationship is that i'm there too, rather than the other person. and it disturbs me to consider that as an immutable identity as opposed to an objective state of being because i know how much it's intertwined FOR ME with my own self-esteem issues but i realize that doesn't apply to everyone. but all of that is very difficult to convey succinctly in a way that doesn't seem pathological. but i guess it is kind of pathological for me personally so.

and anyway there ARE people like yourself who genuinely just don't experience sexual attraction and that's it! so it isn't your or anyone else's fault that that language does fit your experiences (or theoretically could/should). i guess i am resentful of not having the language in the first place and then having the conversation obscured even further by all this gooooooofy microidentity discourse.

i would like to be able to just live as a solitary woman and have that be a neutral 'lifestyle choice' like idk having a pet or not having one. but that is not possible. and i would argue that the 'ace pride' stuff contributes to its impossibility just from the other direction. idk lol

it's just frustrating that evidently there was some move toward trying to address this stuff on a wider level but it doesn't appear that it was a particularly productive dialogue except on a very granular personal level. but tbh maybe that's OK and also just the nature of these sort of conversations about the human experience...regardless of what Society says people can understand each other one-on-one if they both want to understand each other.

it's very clear to me that my experience of the cultural norms of sexual attraction/dating just do not conform to the ways that other people experience them.

i think even just describing it very simply like that without any labels or identities attached is much more meaningful and easy to understand. and i guess it doesn't have to be so hard to just say it. even if it's just to myself

[pinkeoni]

do u realize that st is anti-communist lol

I bet you also think Animal Farm is an anti-communist novel.

Okay, maybe I am giving the show too much credit. This is the same show that just announced their new board game and has already been merchandised to hell and back already. The Duffers are no George Orwell.

But still, there is a difference between what is in the text of the show and how their network chooses to market it.

I can understand where an audience member may see ST as anti-communist, considering that the characters themselves, the heroes of the story that we are meant to root for, are anti-communist. Which makes sense! These are characters living in America during the Cold War with the Soviets. The entirety of the Scoops Troop and Jopper plotlines in season 3 are about bringing down the “evil commies” and Hopper spends most of his time in season 4 being tortured in a Russian prison.

But here’s the thing that most anons seem to be doing, which is conflating the Soviet Union with communism. Saying that Will Byers would be a communist =/= saying that Will Byers would support the Soviet Union. And okay, I may have made that edit of Will in an ushanka, which I did only because editing fictional characters in ushankas is funny. Here it is again:

Let's bring it back to what I mentioned in the very beginning, which is George Orwell's Animal Farm, but specifically the last scene of that novel. The farm animals have successfully led the revolt against the humans, and yet the state of the farm is as bad as it was before, and the pigs are sitting at the table indistinguishable from the humans that they rebelled against in the first place.

Because Orwell's novel isn't saying "communism bad," but rather, the political leaders of the Soviet Union had gone against the original principles they were fighting for.

So the show is definitely anti-soviet, which doesn't equate to anti-communist. To be fair, there isn't much in the show that is expressly pro-communist, but the show isn't really pro-capitalist either. In fact, the show isn't even really that pro-American.

I feel like the ideology of the Cold War was very us versus them, or you're either with us or your against. You are either a red blooded American who is a proud capitalist and uphold the beliefs of your country, or you are a soviet communist pig. But as Papa would say—

The best season to express this is season 3. Season 3 introduces Starcourt Mall— the pinnacle of American consumerism. We learn that the mall has actually been actively hurting the town, causing many local businesses to go belly-up because they just can't compete.

But we also learn that Larry Kline, the mayor of Hawkins, was actually colluding with the Russians the whole time and the mall was a big front for the Russians to conduct their experiments. The point that the show was trying to make is that the same patriotic "All American" man who held a Fourth of July celebration for the town is on the same side as the "Evil Communist Russians."

Let us not forget that this is the same show that said that American government agents were "bad men," and actively used the Reagan/Bush campaign as a symbol of danger. Maybe ST is not the flagship communist show, but it isn't the flagship pro-American capitalist show either.

tagging @aemiron-main since you expressed interest on my poll

Side bar! Did you know that during the Second Red Scare, queer people were labeled as communists and prosecuted, because their lifestyles were considered inherently anti-American, and a security risk to the country? True story!

[darkfictionjude]

Etymology nonnie here!

On the topic of MC's gender. I don't think this is one of the IFs where it was clear the author had an specific gender for the MC while writing the story. I have read some where it was clear the protagonist was written as female/male, and it clashes when you play as anything else.

I say this because I always have played as male. And there wasn't any instance in which I said: "Hmm, this would make more sense if MC was a woman". Now, I do recognize that a female MC can make some themes more evident, powerful, or adds something that otherwise wouldn't be present. For example, Sally's infantilization of MC, his condescension and overprotectiveness gains a different aspect. It can be read as misogynistic, since it would conflate the way Sally conceives and dehumanizes MC with the way women are seen as lesser, and less capable than men. Not that Sally is purposely being misogynistic, but rather than it gets involved with the other issues his relationship with MC has.

It also makes the Orla parallels more obvious, since both her and MC would be the daughters. It would he expected MC was like Orla, that she followed her steps. It makes sense that Prudence tries to mold MC into Orla 2 Electric Boogaloo.

However, that is not to say there isn't things that are interesting or exclusive for male MCs. For instance, it makes Prudence need to make MC a second Orla significantly more abusive and delusional. She is just so disappointed by MC, so disgusted, that she strives to change him into her favorite daughter.

Or, for example, it makes MC more of an anti-Orla. Because now MC is everything Orla isn't. Orla is popular, conventionally beautiful girl, beloved by all, the favorite of her mother, the ideal. While MC is an unsettling boy, hated by most, despised by Prudence, the kind of boy no one wants as a son.

There is also the relationship with Nia. Either a friendship or romantic. Nia's way of understanding feminism, in my opinion (so I may be wrong), holds a very bad overall evaluation of men, and expects them to fail at the bare minimum when it comes to behavior and their actions regarding gender issues. I ignore if Nia believes men can change and evolve from this sorry state (I hope so, otherwise feminism is in a losing battle and it would absolve us men from our wrongdoing). But this belief does provide an interesting conflict to be solved, that adds over the intrigue any relationship MC and Nia already have. Could Nia believe less on a male MC than on a female one? That is an interesting question to ask ourselves.

Now, both male and female MC seem to fail at conforming with the traditional ideals of either gender. Female MC is too detached, too unpolished, too uncaring. While Male MC is not muscular, is not strong (the right way), is stoic for the wrong reasons, doesn't care nor understand sports, etc. So, both also have to confront society by the simple fact they aren't what society demands them to be. Which goes in line with the other present issues MC has, as their mental health and declining social standing (both personal and of their family).

I apologize to non binary folks and their NB MCs. For I cannot think of anything that it isn't obviously unique to them that could be applied to the discussion. Which may come from my own ignorance, as I'm very much a cisgender male (I did explore my identity at one point, and I confirmed it). My redeeming feature is just how gay I am, lol.

Also, unrelated: I have to thank Selfie. I didn't expect the praise and the kind words, and it's appreciated. I think you are cool too, since you usually provide a nice positive energy with your asks. I'm glad you enjoy reading my asks, since I sometimes feel I'm just obnoxious by writing such long ramblings. Or worse, that I'm writing too much but saying too little. Which may be just insecurity from my own part, even if it does not stop me. As long as Jude enjoys it, I'll try to continue. Since I do really love this IF.

Etymology nonnie you really decided to talk to me today huh? 😌

Yeah people have said to me that mc doesn’t really feel like they have a gander in the way think and I feel that’s great. It falls in line in how detached they are to society and thus societal creations. They don’t act like a man nor a woman because they don’t see a reason to and wouldn’t understand why the should to. I’ve read many IFs where I’m like “yeah the MC is clearly a woman”

One of my fears is one day writing an MC that leans too far to one gender despite the reader choosing another gender as apart from flavour text I want all my mcs to have universal thoughts that we all have. I think it has to do with me, as a person while a feminist woman I don’t think like a man nor a woman so it helps to create a protagonist who is gender selectable for their thoughts that don’t pertain to gender but other topics

Speaking of flavour gender text, in one of the routes for who you choose to go talk to that will come up especially sexual harassment women face

It would be interesting to see what Nia thinks of a male mc when you are allowed to talk to her further 😌

[purgemarchlockdown]

Mercy and Amane Momose

(Also Known As: I'm so normal about Amane Momose, lets talk about the conflation of love and pain.)

(CW: Child Abuse, Cults, Discussion around Death and Child Death)

So, recently the 0708 interrogations have answered T2 Question 09:

Q: What does love mean to you

Kazui has a really interesting response that I'll talk about some other time but what I want to focus on is how Amane answers it.

This Translation of her answer is provided by @/milgram_en over on twitter:

A: To spread mercy with no limits

(@/prisoner-000 has there own translation of it over here, it doesn't change my opinion on this, I just thought it would be important to mention.)

Now that's not exactly the clearest answer but we can put it together with T2 Question 02 to get a clearer picture of what she means:

Q: Do you believe you were loved? A: Very much deeply.

Now, as we know, Amane was abused and judged sinful by her parents and punished because of that, this constant punishment and abuse causing her to hate them so much she wanted to kill them.

Amane: Furthermore, isn’t it condescending of you to assume that just because I happen to be a child, I am incapable of hating someone enough to kill them?

Mercy is defined as compassionate treatment of someone you have the power to hurt, clearly what they did to her isn't mercy in the dictionary sense so why does Amane consider it mercy when the actions done towards her were so painful and traumatizing that it really could have killed her? Most people aren't exactly equipped to survive torture, much less a twelve year old who isn't allowed any sort of aid.

Well, here's the thing. Amane Momose was Told and Treated as sinful for her entire life. She was Taught to believe in her own horrible self. She grew up believing herself to be impure and unholy.

She portrays herself as weak and childish in Magic, she punishes herself in Purge March for making small mistakes. No matter how much she says otherwise, Amane Momose doesn't consider herself to be "good."

Magic very heavily features the concept of being a good girl but it's important to note that Amane never Calls herself that. She says that she could be or she's going be. Not she is a good girl.

I swear! I'm going to be a good girl now! That's it!

I promise! I can only become a better girl!

Purge March's good girl theming isn't as intense as Magic's but it is present, especially in this line.

If you become a bad girl, monsters will come out This is the magic that stops that from happening

This line is during The Cat Scene, a scene where she was "weak" and stole away the cat's trial.

Amane: Both pain and illness are trials. According to our teachings, those who run from them are the worst evil there is. That’s one of the four great principles. No matter who you are, that cannot be forgiven. Es: What are you…? Amane: Oh – speaking of which, there is one among the prisoners right now. An evil existence that’s trying to steal people’s trials away from them.

Evil you say?

Amane doesn't believe herself to be good, or even capable of being good and hates that about herself. If she could be good none of this would have happened. Everyone would be happy.

Only if, only if, only if I could be a good girl I hope, I hope everyone can be happy and smile Forever, forever together would be a dream

This is what makes her parent's actions mercy. If Amane is unable to change who she is and Amane is inherently sinful and impure then her parents trying to "cleanse" her using punishment is...mercy. They could do So Much Worse, but they don't, because they think she could be "better."

It's painful yes but their only doing it to help her. And isn't pain a trial anyway? Really her want to get away from it is just a sign of her weakness.

Dear wise one, Is this ok? Is it ok to be weak sometimes?

And this training, is Supposed to make her less weak. They believe there's still a chance for her, a glimmer of hope that she could be better. That with enough time she won't be Amane Momose anymore. She'll be someone better.

And what's more merciful than that really?

Amane: I’m happy that I was born to my parents! It was a bit difficult, and it could feel restrictive sometimes, but I’m really happy that I could grow up on such beautiful teachings! I want to live this way!